Supreme Court of India
Digital Supreme Court Reports
The Official Law Report Fortnightly ISSN: 3048-4839 (Online)
Home
Full Text

WG. CDR. ARIFUR RAHMAN KHAN AND ALEYA SULTANA AND ORS. vs. DLF SOUTHERN HOMES PVT LTD. (NOW KNOWN AS BEGUR OMR HOMES PVT. LTD.) AND ORS.

SCR Citation: [2020] 9 S.C.R. 136
Year/Volume: 2020/ Volume 9
Date of Judgment: 24 August 2020
Petitioner: WG. CDR. ARIFUR RAHMAN KHAN AND ALEYA SULTANA AND ORS.
Disposal Nature: Appeals Partly Allowed
Neutral Citation: 2020 INSC 503
Judgment Delivered by: Honble Dr. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud
Respondent: DLF SOUTHERN HOMES PVT LTD. (NOW KNOWN AS BEGUR OMR HOMES PVT. LTD.) AND ORS.
Case Type: CIVIL APPEAL /6239/2019
Order/Judgment: Judgment
1. Headnote

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – s.2(1)(g) – Deficiency ofservice – Complaint by flat buyers seeking compensation inter aliaalleged delay in handing over possession of the flats – Dismissedby NCDRC – On appeal, held: Failure of the developer to handover possession within the contractually stipulated period amountsto a deficiency of service u/s.2(1)(g) – In the present case, underthe Apartment Buyers Agreement (ABA), the developer was obligatedto hand over possession of the flats within thirty-six months of thedate of the agreement which condition was breached – Existenceand extent of the delay constitute an admitted factual position –There has been a gross delay on the part of the developer incompleting construction ranging between two and four years –Further, the agreement is manifestly one-sided – Nature and quantumof delay are such that the compensation provided in Clause 14,ABA would not provide sufficient recompense to the purchasers –Jurisdiction of consumer forum to award just compensation as anincident of its power to direct removal of a deficiency in service isnot constrained by the terms of a rate prescribed in an unfair bargain– Impugned judgment set aside – Flat buyers entitled tocompensation.Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – s.14(1)(e) – Jurisdiction ofconsumer forum – Nature and extent of – Discussed.Consumer Protection – Flat buyers’ agreements – Delayedpossession – Award of compensation in addition to agreement –Duty of Courts – Held: Ordinarily, courts would hold parties downto a contractual bargain – However, cannot be oblivious to theone-sided nature of agreements drafted by and to protect interestof the developer.Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – s.2(1)(o) – “service” –Meaning of – Held: ‘service’ in s.2(1)(o) means a service of anydescription made available to potential users including the provisionof facilities in connection with (among other things) housingconstruction.Consumer Protection – Claim against delayed possession offlats – Right of flat buyer to obtain deed of conveyance – Held:Unreasonable to expect that in order to pursue a compensationclaim for delayed handing over of possession, the purchaser mustindefinitely defer obtaining a conveyance of the premises or, if theyseek to obtain a Deed of Conveyance to forsake the right to claimcompensation.Consumer Protection – Delay in handing over possession ofresidential flats – Interest in flats transferred – Compensation fordelayed possession – Entitlement of subsequent transferees –Discussed.Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – s.2(1)(g) – Held: Deficiencyu/s.2(1)(g) means a fault, imperfection, shortcoming or inadequacyin the quality, nature and manner of performance.

2. Case referred
3. Act
  • Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (68 of 1986)
4. Keyword
  • Consumer Protection Act 1986
  • Deficiency of Service
5. Equivalent citation
    Citation(s) 2020 (16) SCC 512 = 2020 (16) Suppl. SCC 512 = 2020 (8) JT 379 = 2020 (8) Suppl. JT 379 = 2020 (10) SCALE 103